Brexit is a golden chance to throw some EU regulations on a bonfire

Follow the author of this article

Follow the topics within this article

Theresa May says that she wants to review regulations repatriated from Brussels.Credit:
ANDY RAIN

Tomorrow, Britain triggers Article 50. This will put us on a course out of the European Union and into the wider world. But what type of country do we wish to be at the end of that journey? The Brexit process is about reclaiming sovereignty, but it must also be about reforming the state. Many people voted for Leave because they are sick and tired of EU rules governing their lives and their businesses. Now the Government says that after it has repatriated laws and navigated Brexit, it will also try to get rid of as many regulations as possible. That is an excellent ambition. This newspaper will stubbornly pressure them to achieve it.

Free trade, competition and a state that sets light but well enforced rules: these are the best ways to ensure not only a healthy market but also a fair one.

Of course, there is a right way to do this. Some EU-originated regulation might be deemed necessary to continue doing trade with European countries. In some instances, the UK could remain within the remit of EU agencies for a time given the complexity of immediately going it alone. The CBI says that Britain would have to create domestic versions of EU regulatory agencies, and perhaps this is necessary to smooth Brexit. But thereafter their rules should be revisited.

Some of the repatriated regulations are laws that we would have passed anyway, whether we were in the EU or not. There is an irritating conceit among some Remainers that Europe has civilised the UK, that without our membership we would still be sending children down pits. On the contrary, Britain has been the originator of a great deal of progressive legislation.

What Britain does not have time for is vexacious regulations, particularly those that hinder business and depress growth. Silly interventions run from the bizarrely specific – such as laws governing the power of light bulbs and vacuum cleaners, or household recycling, which threatens to litter the streets with bins – to industry wide rules that do damage to the economy. Consider the restrictive Working Time Directive, which has been a source of complaint among surgeons and medical staff. Or the EU’s Renewable Energy Directive, which requires the UK to generate 15 per cent of its energy from renewable sources by 2020 – the cost of which is passed on to the consumer through their bills.

Traditionally, this has not been the British way. Our historic attitude towards regulation prefers a lighter touch: so long as one is doing no harm, businessmen and workers should be left alone. And Britain’s experience since the Eighties has shown that as taxes are lowered and services privatised, so innovation expands choice and – crucially – delivers a better service for the customer. Free trade, competition and a state that sets light but well enforced rules: these are the best ways to ensure not only a healthy market but also a fair one.

If Britain must repatriate annoying laws in the short-term to facilitate Brexit so be it. But the Government must, as soon as possible, identify what it wants to get rid of once we are out of the EU. It must lay out a plan of action for its 2020 manifesto, a plan that offers to put this country on a radically different course. And it should invite experienced businessmen – just as Donald Trump is doing in the United States – to vet regulation.

What is the alternative? The Labour Party has laid out six tests for Brexit that are designed to address the Labour Party’s problems rather than Britain’s. Labour does not want to be seen to question the will of the people but it dearly loves the EU, so its prescription for a good deal is that Britain remains wedded in perpetuity to European structures and European-style regulations. That would be a tragedy. How awful if Britain was to go through everything it has – decades of debate, a divsive referendum and tortuous divorce proceedings – only to emerge almost exactly the same as it was before. This would be bad news for the economy, too, which will need to become deregulated and competitive.

Theresa May should seek to make the most of this golden moment, to repatriate the laws while, at the same time, analysing which can go. For the Conservatives, this is a chance to show how Brexit can benefit everyone by expanding wealth and liberty. This newspaper will be making sure that they honour that commitment.